As Mayor Rahm Emanuel rolls out his long-delayed speed camera plan, new numbers his office released suggest that drivers who speed in Chicago could rack up way more in fines than a cash-starved City Hall initially projected.

The mayor had hoped to bring in $30 million this year. But results from a monthlong test of the automated camera system indicate the city could reap well into the hundreds of millions of dollars in the program’s first year.

The number of potential citations came as a surprise to even the city’s speed camera operator.

“I think everyone was shocked at the numbers,” said Charles Territo, a spokesman for American Traffic Solutions. “It became very obvious there is a speeding problem in school and park zones in the city of Chicago.”

Had tickets been issued for all of those test-period violations, the city could have collected about $4.7 million in ticket revenue in a single month.

Even accounting for the road lobby, it is still hard to understand why governments aren’t doing more with speed enforcement. It is a win-win situation — more revenue and safer streets.

Share this:

Like this:

Related

13 Responses

Every time I drive through a construction zone on the tollway I seem to literally be the only person obeying the work zone limit (you get *awesome* gas milage at 72km/hr / 45 mi/hr constant-smooth-motion on a highway) and thus the only person out of many many *many* thousands not up for the $[large number] minimum fine the signs promise yet clearly no one is paying.

Drivers always complain about these being “another way for the city to take our money.” Which is frankly ridiculous. If the rates of speeding are so high (anecdotally, they are terrible, I see drivers speeding all the time here), these will be good for safety and for revenue.

Whether that money is spent wisely, I’m doubtful. I’d argue it should go toward streetscape improvements and funding transportation options for pedestrians and bikes. But it will probably end up in some mayor slush fund. Another reason why I’d love to see a downtown “congestion charge,” but also worry where the generated revenue would go. The downtown parking garage surcharge was supposed to go to transport projects but I have not seen any evidence of that.

The fact that the city has not created dedicated accounts for this revenue-stream seriously implies that this money will not be set aside nor spent in any targeted fashion. Whether these revenues will help plug budget shortfalls or create “slush funds” remains to be seen, but expecting this money to go towards safety or transportation improvements (or “for the kids”) is not grounded in how this deal has actually gone down.

I think generating revenue should come from politicians saying “Hey, we need revenue to perform the basic tasks of government and we need a tax rate of x% to do it.” Or from popular referendums.

Mayor Emanuel explicitly said these cameras were not for revenue generation, that they were for safety improvements. It’s undermines the ability of government to act in all respects when leaders misrepresent programs to the people. Finally, having targeted revenues for every last thing leads to massive corruption as you get scores of poorly understood revenue mechanisms. Nobody ever gives up a revenue stream that isn’t needed and the “general” funds become so paltry that basic functions are cut to the bone.

If you are going to use speed cameras for revenue, say “We’re going to raise a lot of money off all the unsafe morons who speed in our city! Get ready to pay you dirty SOBs!” Don’t react with somber surprise when the wheelbarrows of cash you anticipated all along start rolling in. It’s dishonest.

We should have speed limits, we should enforce them in the most cost-effective way we can, and there should be a punishment for breaking the law. If that punishment is monetary, the revenue will provide tax relief to law-abiding Chicagoans. Those offended by using fines to enforce the law should be given the option of doing public service.

Wrong!! They do not make it safer. Someone getting a ticket a month later does nothing to immediately correct that action! Secondly, the worst and most dangerous drivers will not correct their behavior. They will use devices to allow them to avoid having their license show up on camera. What part of a business getting rich of a ticket sounds right to begin with! Most of these companies were getting 50-75 percent of the fines generated some not even based in the US. Ask a cop how many rear end collisions suddenly happen when someone looks up and sees a camera and slams on the brakes!!! Accidents increase not decrease with red light cameras so again the safety perspective is pure bs.

Speaking from personal experience, even a delayed ticket is a huge deterrent. I drive on the West Side Drive in Manhattan (NY). And I used to blow through the red lights. After getting two of these photo tickets, not anymore.

So, let me see if I follow this — it’s the presence of the camera, not the motorist who has failed to anticipate/read a changing light and driving at a proper speed for the road conditions that causes this alleged outbreak of rear-end collisions. So, beyond the anecdotal cop, where’s the stats? The bs is at the end of your fingertips, Mark. Your self-serving rationalization and entitlement is driving your argument. And of what difference would it be whether it was an American vs. foreign-held corporation that what profiting from the “fleecing” of the driving public??